Chilean vs Chickasaw Community Comparison

COMPARE

Chilean
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Chickasaw
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Chileans

Chickasaw

Excellent
Fair
8,759
SOCIAL INDEX
85.1/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
51st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Chickasaw Integration in Chilean Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 104,104,015 people shows a very strong positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw within Chilean communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.892. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chileans within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.126% in Chickasaw. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chileans corresponds to an increase of 125.5 Chickasaw.
Chilean Integration in Chickasaw Communities

Chilean vs Chickasaw Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($106,611 compared to $82,193, a difference of 29.7%), median household income ($90,605 compared to $70,005, a difference of 29.4%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($99,900 compared to $77,929, a difference of 28.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (26.3% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 3.3%), median female earnings ($40,757 compared to $34,414, a difference of 18.4%), and householder income under 25 years ($53,185 compared to $44,763, a difference of 18.8%).
Chilean vs Chickasaw Income
Income MetricChileanChickasaw
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$46,459
Tragic
$36,475
Median Family Income
Exceptional
$108,429
Tragic
$85,356
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$90,605
Tragic
$70,005
Median Earnings
Exceptional
$48,504
Tragic
$40,672
Median Male Earnings
Exceptional
$56,973
Tragic
$47,832
Median Female Earnings
Exceptional
$40,757
Tragic
$34,414
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Exceptional
$53,185
Tragic
$44,763
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Exceptional
$99,900
Tragic
$77,929
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Exceptional
$106,611
Tragic
$82,193
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$63,957
Tragic
$53,732
Wage/Income Gap
Fair
26.3%
Tragic
27.2%

Chilean vs Chickasaw Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (15.6% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 40.1%), single male poverty (11.9% compared to 16.3%, a difference of 36.9%), and female poverty among 25-34 year olds (12.8% compared to 17.0%, a difference of 33.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65 (11.2% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 4.5%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (12.6% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 8.6%), and married-couple family poverty (4.9% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 17.1%).
Chilean vs Chickasaw Poverty
Poverty MetricChileanChickasaw
Poverty
Excellent
11.8%
Tragic
14.7%
Families
Excellent
8.5%
Tragic
10.8%
Males
Excellent
10.7%
Tragic
13.5%
Females
Excellent
12.9%
Tragic
15.9%
Females 18 to 24 years
Exceptional
19.1%
Tragic
24.5%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
12.8%
Tragic
17.0%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
15.6%
Tragic
21.8%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
14.8%
Tragic
19.5%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
15.0%
Tragic
19.8%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
15.1%
Tragic
19.6%
Single Males
Exceptional
11.9%
Tragic
16.3%
Single Females
Exceptional
19.9%
Tragic
26.3%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
15.7%
Tragic
19.0%
Single Mothers
Exceptional
27.9%
Tragic
34.4%
Married Couples
Excellent
4.9%
Tragic
5.8%
Seniors Over 65 years
Fair
11.2%
Good
10.7%
Seniors Over 75 years
Poor
12.6%
Exceptional
11.6%
Receiving Food Stamps
Excellent
11.0%
Tragic
13.1%

Chilean vs Chickasaw Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.2% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 24.7%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.2% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 19.4%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.1% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 15.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment (5.0% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 0.20%), female unemployment (5.1% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 0.31%), and unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (10.0% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 0.59%).
Chilean vs Chickasaw Unemployment
Unemployment MetricChileanChickasaw
Unemployment
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
5.0%
Males
Exceptional
5.0%
Excellent
5.2%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Excellent
5.1%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.3%
Exceptional
11.2%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Average
17.6%
Exceptional
16.7%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
10.0%
Exceptional
9.9%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Excellent
6.5%
Fair
6.7%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Exceptional
5.2%
Tragic
6.2%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.4%
Tragic
4.9%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.2%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Good
4.8%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Good
4.8%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Good
5.3%
Exceptional
4.7%
Seniors > 65
Excellent
5.1%
Exceptional
4.4%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
8.4%
Exceptional
7.3%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
7.2%
Tragic
9.0%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Excellent
8.8%
Exceptional
8.6%
Women w/ Children < 18
Good
5.3%
Good
5.4%

Chilean vs Chickasaw Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (35.8% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 7.2%), in labor force | age > 16 (66.0% compared to 62.3%, a difference of 6.0%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.4% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 5.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 0.080%), in labor force | age 30-34 (84.9% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 3.7%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (85.0% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 3.8%).
Chilean vs Chickasaw Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricChileanChickasaw
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Exceptional
66.0%
Tragic
62.3%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
80.1%
Tragic
76.2%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Poor
35.8%
Exceptional
38.3%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Poor
74.5%
Poor
74.5%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Excellent
85.0%
Tragic
81.9%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Excellent
84.9%
Tragic
81.9%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
84.7%
Tragic
80.9%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
83.4%
Tragic
79.0%

Chilean vs Chickasaw Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.2% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 24.2%), divorced or separated (12.0% compared to 14.2%, a difference of 18.8%), and births to unmarried women (30.7% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 18.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (28.1% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 0.31%), currently married (47.0% compared to 46.6%, a difference of 0.84%), and family households (65.2% compared to 64.4%, a difference of 1.2%).
Chilean vs Chickasaw Family Structure
Family Structure MetricChileanChickasaw
Family Households
Exceptional
65.2%
Good
64.4%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.1%
Exceptional
28.2%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
47.5%
Fair
45.9%
Average Family Size
Average
3.23
Tragic
3.19
Single Father Households
Exceptional
2.2%
Tragic
2.8%
Single Mother Households
Good
6.1%
Tragic
7.0%
Currently Married
Good
47.0%
Average
46.6%
Divorced or Separated
Good
12.0%
Tragic
14.2%
Births to Unmarried Women
Good
30.7%
Tragic
36.3%

Chilean vs Chickasaw Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.9% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 25.9%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.4% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 16.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.7% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 12.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.2% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 2.3%), 2 or more vehicles in household (56.1% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 5.1%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.7% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 12.7%).
Chilean vs Chickasaw Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricChileanChickasaw
No Vehicles Available
Excellent
9.9%
Exceptional
7.9%
1+ Vehicles Available
Good
90.2%
Exceptional
92.3%
2+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
56.1%
Exceptional
59.0%
3+ Vehicles Available
Good
19.7%
Exceptional
22.2%
4+ Vehicles Available
Good
6.4%
Exceptional
7.4%

Chilean vs Chickasaw Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (5.3% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 56.4%), master's degree (16.9% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 48.3%), and doctorate degree (2.2% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 42.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 10th grade (93.9% compared to 94.1%, a difference of 0.16%), nursery school (98.0% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.39%), and kindergarten (98.0% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.41%).
Chilean vs Chickasaw Education Level
Education Level MetricChileanChickasaw
No Schooling Completed
Good
2.0%
Exceptional
1.7%
Nursery School
Average
98.0%
Exceptional
98.4%
Kindergarten
Average
98.0%
Exceptional
98.4%
1st Grade
Average
97.9%
Exceptional
98.3%
2nd Grade
Average
97.9%
Exceptional
98.3%
3rd Grade
Average
97.8%
Exceptional
98.2%
4th Grade
Average
97.5%
Exceptional
98.0%
5th Grade
Average
97.3%
Exceptional
97.9%
6th Grade
Average
97.1%
Exceptional
97.6%
7th Grade
Average
96.0%
Exceptional
96.7%
8th Grade
Average
95.7%
Exceptional
96.4%
9th Grade
Good
95.0%
Exceptional
95.5%
10th Grade
Good
93.9%
Excellent
94.1%
11th Grade
Excellent
92.9%
Fair
92.3%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Excellent
91.7%
Tragic
90.3%
High School Diploma
Good
89.6%
Poor
88.4%
GED/Equivalency
Excellent
86.6%
Tragic
83.8%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
67.6%
Tragic
60.4%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
62.0%
Tragic
53.3%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
49.4%
Tragic
38.6%
Bachelor's Degree
Exceptional
41.2%
Tragic
30.4%
Master's Degree
Exceptional
16.9%
Tragic
11.4%
Professional Degree
Exceptional
5.3%
Tragic
3.4%
Doctorate Degree
Exceptional
2.2%
Tragic
1.5%

Chilean vs Chickasaw Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (10.2% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 57.3%), hearing disability (2.9% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 56.1%), and vision disability (2.1% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 53.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (17.0% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 8.7%), disability age over 75 (46.5% compared to 51.2%, a difference of 10.2%), and self-care disability (2.3% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 22.4%).
Chilean vs Chickasaw Disability
Disability MetricChileanChickasaw
Disability
Exceptional
11.1%
Tragic
15.2%
Males
Exceptional
10.7%
Tragic
15.1%
Females
Exceptional
11.5%
Tragic
15.2%
Age | Under 5 years
Poor
1.3%
Tragic
1.7%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Exceptional
5.4%
Tragic
6.8%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Exceptional
6.3%
Tragic
9.0%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Exceptional
10.2%
Tragic
16.1%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
22.0%
Tragic
30.2%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
46.5%
Tragic
51.2%
Vision
Exceptional
2.1%
Tragic
3.2%
Hearing
Excellent
2.9%
Tragic
4.5%
Cognitive
Excellent
17.0%
Tragic
18.5%
Ambulatory
Exceptional
5.7%
Tragic
8.0%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.3%
Tragic
2.9%